Case Summary
Mohamed Khallouli, a Tunisian human rights defender, was sentenced to one month of imprisonment and fined 1,000 Tunisian dinars following Facebook posts published on his personal account. The posts included satirical criticism of the then Head of Government, Ahmed Hachani, the Minister of Agriculture, and the President of the Republic, as well as a post condemning police violence.
Personal Information:
Name: Mohamed Khallouli
Profession: Human rights defender
Nationality: Tunisian
Charge: Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code, which criminalizes intentionally causing harm to others or disturbing their peace through public telecommunications networks.
Sentence: One month’s imprisonment and a fine of 1,000 Tunisian dinars.
Events of the Violation:
Mohamed Khallouli is a civil society activist and human rights defender. On 2 August 2024, a summons was delivered to his residence in the governorate of Béja requiring him to appear the same day before the Judicial Police in Béja. As he was not present at his residence, the head of the police unit contacted him by telephone. Mr. Khallouli informed the officer that he was residing in Tunis and was therefore unable to attend. He was subsequently notified that he would be contacted by a judicial police unit in Tunis and instructed to appear on 5 August 2024.
On 5 August 2024, Mr. Khallouli was questioned regarding seven Facebook posts that were deemed to potentially constitute offences under Article 24 of Decree-Law No. 54 of 2022, which criminalizes the use of information systems to publish or disseminate false information with the intent to defame others or damage their reputation. He was also investigated for alleged incitement to hate speech against a public official and for intentionally causing harm to others through public telecommunications networks under Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code. Following questioning, he was released pending further proceedings and served with a summons to appear before the Public Prosecutor on 7 August 2024.
Prior to the hearing before the Public Prosecutor, defense counsel submitted a request for the prosecution to proceed solely under Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code instead of Article 24 of Decree-Law No. 54, arguing that the posts did not involve the dissemination of false information. Following questioning by the Public Prosecutor, Mr. Khallouli was maintained at liberty but was referred the same day to an investigating judge on the basis of both provisions.
On 14 August 2024, the investigation was formally closed. The charge under Article 24 of Decree-Law No. 54 of 2022 was dismissed, while prosecution under Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code was maintained. The case was referred to the Misdemeanor Chamber of the Court of First Instance of Béja. A six-month travel ban was also imposed during the investigation phase.
The case was heard on 20 May 2025. On 27 May 2025, the Court of First Instance of Béja sentenced Mr. Khallouli to one month of imprisonment and imposed a fine of 1,000 Tunisian dinars for intentionally causing harm to others through public telecommunications networks under Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code.
Mr. Khallouli appealed the judgment. On 5 February 2026, the Court of Appeal upheld the conviction and confirmed the sentence of one month of imprisonment with immediate enforcement, along with a fine of 1,000 Tunisian dinars.
Human Rights Violations
The prosecution of Mohamed Khallouli constitutes a direct interference with the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as criticism directed at public officials falls squarely within the realm of public debate, which is entitled to the highest level of legal protection. This right is guaranteed under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It is also protected under Article 37 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia, which provides that: “Freedom of opinion, thought, expression, information and publication shall be guaranteed. No prior censorship shall be exercised over these freedoms.”
Furthermore, the reliance on broadly worded criminal provisions raises concerns regarding the principle of legality and the principle of proportionality. Mr. Khallouli was initially prosecuted under both Article 24 of Decree-Law No. 54 of 2022 and Article 86 of the Telecommunications Code, before charges under Decree-Law 54 were dropped and prosecution was maintained solely under Article 86. This procedural trajectory reflects a tendency to expand criminal liability in cases involving digital expression, potentially enabling broad interpretations of penal provisions at the expense of freedom of expression safeguards.
In addition, the imposition of a six-month travel ban during the investigation phase constitutes a restriction on the right to freedom of movement. Such a measure should only be justified by compelling necessity and must be proportionate to the seriousness of the alleged conduct. This does not appear to align with the nature of the facts, which relate to opinion-based social media posts. The travel ban is inconsistent with Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms that everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. It also runs counter to Article 12 of the ICCPR, which guarantees that everyone lawfully within a State’s territory has the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose their residence. Any restrictions on these rights must be provided by law, necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others, and consistent with the other rights recognized in the Covenant.